Nagarjuna, the 2nd-century Buddhist philosopher, spent his career dismantling a specific intellectual habit: the assumption that things have fixed, inherent natures. His method — called prasanga, the reductio ad absurdum — wasn't destructive for its own sake. It was designed to reveal that what we take as bedrock is often just a calcified interpretation that stopped being tested. This matters in finance because most insights don't fail when they're formed — they fail when they harden into identity. The moment a thesis becomes 'what I believe about this sector' rather than 'what the current structure of this situation suggests,' you've stopped receiving new information and started defending a position. Nagarjuna's corrective was radical: keep the insight provisional not because you doubt it, but because provisionalness is what keeps it alive and functional. A held-lightly view updates. A view you've bonded with filters out its own contradictions.

What is the oldest active thesis in your financial picture — and what would it cost you, socially or reputationally, to abandon it this week?

Drawing from Madhyamaka Buddhist Philosophy — Nagarjuna (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā)